Case Report: Blurring the immunological border in the diagnostic evaluation of optic neuritis
- 1Department of Neurosciences, University of Padua
- 2Neuroradiology Unit, University Hospital of Padua
- 3Multiple Sclerosis Centre, Day Hospital and Centre for Advanced Neurological Therapies Unit, University Hospital of Padua
Abstract
Background: Optic neuritis (ON) is a common inflammatory syndrome that may represent the initial manifestation of multiple sclerosis (MS), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody–associated disease (MOGAD), or other autoimmune disorders. Although serological testing and imaging criteria have improved diagnostic accuracy, early immunological and radiological findings may overlap, creating diagnostic uncertainty with relevant therapeutic implications.
Case presentation: A 48-year-old woman presented with sudden, painless monocular visual loss. Orbital MRI showed optic perineuritis with perineural dural enhancement. The combination of optic perineuritis and subsequent optic nerve involvement initially suggested a MOGAD-like phenotype or Ischemic Optic Neuropathy. Although extensive immunological screening found a strong positivity of anti-β ₂ glycoprotein1 and anti-cardiolipin IgM antibodies, which prompted a rheumatological evaluation to exclude systemic autoimmune diseases like antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), fluorescein angiography was negative. Moreover, both anti-aquaporin-4 antibodies and anti- MOG antibodies (tested with also live cell-based assays) were negative. On the other hand, cerebrospinal fluid analysis revealed CSF-restricted IgG oligoclonal bands (Pattern II). High-dose intravenous methylprednisolone produced partial clinical improvement, but visual deficit persisted. During longitudinal follow-up, OCT demonstrated ganglion cell layer thinning, while a further MRI revealed a new juxtacortical lesion, fulfilling dissemination in space criteria and supporting a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Therefore, anti-CD20 therapy was initiated due to persistent disability.
Discussion: This case illustrates how early immunological and radiological red flags may suggest other systemic autoimmune diseases despite eventual confirmation of MS. The diagnostic pathway was shaped by the temporal evolution of imaging and biomarker findings rather than by isolated baseline features. The observation emphasizes the risk of premature diagnostic labelling in seronegative optic neuritis and highlights the need for cautious interpretation of early red flags within a longitudinal framework.
Conclusion: At the immunological border in the diagnostic evaluation of optic neuritis, early phenotypic presentations may not reliably predict final disease classification. Longitudinal integration of clinical evolution, imaging findings, and biomarker data is essential to achieve diagnostic certainty and guide appropriate long-term treatment decisions. This case supports a dynamic, evidence-based diagnostic approach in atypical immune-mediated optic neuritis.
Related
- A Diagnostic Challenge in Linear Dermatoses: Differentiating Inflammatory Linear Verrucous Epidermal Nevus (ILVEN) Using Dermoscopy and Reflectance Confocal Microscopy-A Case Report.
- Case Report: Pallister-Hall syndrome associated with a previously unreported de novo GLI3 frameshift variant and diagnostic insights from the Middle East
- Semaglutide and optic neuritis in the FDA adverse event reporting system: a comparator-based, time-calibrated pharmacovigilance analysis
- Case Report: Diagnostic dilemma: rebound thymic hyperplasia mimicking mediastinal relapse following chemoimmunotherapy in pediatric jejunal Burkitt lymphoma
- Case Report: Paralytic rabies masquerading as traumatic spinal cord injury: a diagnostic pitfall in trauma surgery
BibTeX
@article{basili2026case,
title = {{Case Report: Blurring the immunological border in the diagnostic evaluation of optic neuritis}},
author = {Elisa Basili and Valentina Annamaria Mauceri and Alessandro Di Paola and Marco Zoccarato and Francesca Rinaldi and Paola Perini and Chiara Briani and Marco Puthenparampil},
journal = {Frontiers in Immunology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3389/fimmu.2026.1824655},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1824655/full},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Case Report: Blurring the immunological border in the diagnostic evaluation of optic neuritis
AU - Elisa Basili
AU - Valentina Annamaria Mauceri
AU - Alessandro Di Paola
AU - Marco Zoccarato
AU - Francesca Rinaldi
AU - Paola Perini
AU - Chiara Briani
AU - Marco Puthenparampil
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/22
JO - Frontiers in Immunology
DO - 10.3389/fimmu.2026.1824655
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1824655/full
AB - Background: Optic neuritis (ON) is a common inflammatory syndrome that may represent the initial manifestation of multiple sclerosis (MS), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibody–associated disease (MOGAD), or other autoimmune disorders. Although serological testing and imaging criteria have improved diagnostic accuracy, early immunological and radiological findings may overlap, creating diagnostic uncertainty with relevant therapeutic implications. Case presentation: A 48-year-old woman presented with sudden, painless monocular visual loss. Orbital MRI showed optic perineuritis with perineural dural enhancement. The combination of optic perineuritis and subsequent optic nerve involvement initially suggested a MOGAD-like phenotype or Ischemic Optic Neuropathy. Although extensive immunological screening found a strong positivity of anti-β ₂ glycoprotein1 and anti-cardiolipin IgM antibodies, which prompted a rheumatological evaluation to exclude systemic autoimmune diseases like antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), fluorescein angiography was negative. Moreover, both anti-aquaporin-4 antibodies and anti- MOG antibodies (tested with also live cell-based assays) were negative. On the other hand, cerebrospinal fluid analysis revealed CSF-restricted IgG oligoclonal bands (Pattern II). High-dose intravenous methylprednisolone produced partial clinical improvement, but visual deficit persisted. During longitudinal follow-up, OCT demonstrated ganglion cell layer thinning, while a further MRI revealed a new juxtacortical lesion, fulfilling dissemination in space criteria and supporting a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Therefore, anti-CD20 therapy was initiated due to persistent disability. Discussion: This case illustrates how early immunological and radiological red flags may suggest other systemic autoimmune diseases despite eventual confirmation of MS. The diagnostic pathway was shaped by the temporal evolution of imaging and biomarker findings rather than by isolated baseline features. The observation emphasizes the risk of premature diagnostic labelling in seronegative optic neuritis and highlights the need for cautious interpretation of early red flags within a longitudinal framework. Conclusion: At the immunological border in the diagnostic evaluation of optic neuritis, early phenotypic presentations may not reliably predict final disease classification. Longitudinal integration of clinical evolution, imaging findings, and biomarker data is essential to achieve diagnostic certainty and guide appropriate long-term treatment decisions. This case supports a dynamic, evidence-based diagnostic approach in atypical immune-mediated optic neuritis.
SN - 1664-3224
ER -